Science Capability Audit - Water Final Report, July 2014 This review audit and strategic analysis of water related applied Biography of Paul Greenfield, Lead Author science and research within the Queensland Government has been undertaken as part of the Government’s examination of its science Paul Greenfield AO is the current Chairman of the Australian capability and investment, following the state election in March 2012. Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and Chair of the International Water Centre - a joint venture The Queensland Government is committed to using science and between The University of Queensland (UQ) and Griffith innovation for economic success by ensuring it has access to the best University, and the International Energy Centre - a joint possible scientific advice, that this is directed toward meeting the venture between three universities and a major resource future policy challenges of Queensland industries, and contributes to company. sound decision-making about environmental, economic, industry and social issues. He has a Bachelor of Engineering and a PhD in chemical engineering from UNSW and Bachelor of Economics from This is the first thematic audit of the Queensland Government’s UQ. Throughout his career, he has worked in the private scientific capability and investment oversighted by the Office of the sector, with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Queensland Chief Scientist. Research Organisation (CSIRO) and at universities in Australia and the USA. From 1975 until the end of 2011, he © Office of the Queensland Chief Scientist (OQCS), 2014. worked at UQ, initially as an academic and finally as Vice Acknowledgements Chancellor and President. His research interests have been in Photos courtesy of: Tropwater; DepositPhotos; Wikimedia; Sunwater; SEQ Water; environmental and energy management, wastewater CSIRO management, biotechnology and technology innovation. Data supplied by: • Queensland Departments of: Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Energy and As well as maintaining an active consulting activity throughout Water Supply; Environment and Heritage Protection; Natural Resources and his career, he has been involved in establishing a number of Mines; Queensland Health; and Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts commercial enterprises aimed at taking early stage intellectual • Queensland universities: Central Queensland University; Griffith University; James capital to the market. Current activities involve working with Cook University; Queensland University of Technology; The University of industry and government to address water-related issues Queensland; University of the Sunshine Coast; and University of Southern associated with coal seam gas as well as exploring the Queensland • The Bureau of Meteorology increasing connections between energy and water • Water utilities: Sunwater; SEQ Water; Unity Water; Health Waterways management, particularly in the urban setting. • Research: Urban Water Security Research Alliance; CSIRO; Natural Environmental Research Program; National Centre for Groundwater Research; He holds board positions with Healthy Waterways Ltd and the Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence Great Barrier Reef Foundation Ltd referred to in this review. • Gold Coast City Council Co-authored by: Jenny Riches, Office of the Queensland Chief Scientist Interim Report | Water Science Capability Audit 2 Contents Executive Summary 4 Conclusions 8 Recommendations 9 Introduction 10 Why do governments invest in science and R&D? Terms of Reference 11 Audit Process 12 Key Findings by Terms of Reference (ToR) - ToR 1 Scope and content of the current program 13 - ToR 2 Alignment of current program 20 - ToR 3 Strengths, gaps, overlaps & conflicts 21 - ToR 4 Key clients and stakeholders 22 - ToR 5 Resources and capability 23 - ToR 6 Advantages and disadvantages of current delivery approaches 26 - ToR 7 & 8 Alternative models and benefits/costs and risks 27 Appendix 1 31 Consultation List Appendix 2 33 Three Alternative Models Interim Report | Water Science Capability Audit 3 Executive Summary • The Chief Scientist is oversighting a series of audits/reviews looking at • Meetings were held with all five sponsoring departments and with the applied science and research and development (R&D) undertaken the Departments of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning or commissioned by the Queensland Government. This audit focused (DSDIP), Premier and Cabinet (DPC), Health, and National Parks, on the Queensland Government investment, capability and delivery in Recreation, Sport and Racing (DNPRSR). water-related science and R&D. • Data was gathered from the five sponsoring departments on • The audit had two broad objectives – to provide an evidence base expenditure in water-related applied science and R&D at program in arguing for future investment and policy directions, and to assess (not project) level for the past five years (when available) the effectiveness of current and alternative delivery mechanisms. categorised against an established Council of Australian Governments (COAG) framework (eight classifications). • The audit was sponsored by the Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), Energy and Water Supply (DEWS), • Information for 2012-13 was also collected from a range of other Environment and Heritage Protection, (DEHP), Natural Resources research, university, utility and government-related agencies, e.g. and Mines (DNRM), and Science, Information Technology, Seqwater; Unity Water; Bureau of Meteorology (BoM); Australian Innovation and the Arts (DSITIA). Water Recycling Centre of Excellence (AWRCoE); CSIRO; Healthy Waterways; and Queensland universities. • It was the first thematic audit, the previous audits being departmentally focussed. Being thematic, the boundaries were less • In 2012-13, the five departments managed funds totalling $37.5 clear-cut than they were for the departmental audits. million to support water related science and R&D activities. Of this, $18.8 million came from their internal funds (i.e. the funds were • The audit included both quantity and quality issues related to water, provided as an allocation by the Queensland Government to the e.g. supply, catchment hydrology, waterways, ports and the inner department and the projects managed – but not necessarily carried Great Barrier Reef but excluded the outer reef, while recognising out - within the respective departments). Inter-departmental transfers there were interactions between terrestrial and marine environments (i.e. the funds were sourced from Queensland Government e.g. mainland run-off and crown-of-thorns (COTS) outbreaks. departments other than that carrying out the project) accounted for $6.5 million (mostly to DSITIA). Another $12.2 million was attracted • Compliance monitoring in itself was not included, but investigative from bodies external to the Queensland Government for water- monitoring was. Likewise, where data was gathered to manage a related science and R&D (mostly to DNRM and DSITIA). system in the short term but gave rise over time to longitudinal datasets which were quality assured, it was considered that this activity generated a science asset(e.g. streamflow or groundwater data, or ecosystem quality data), even though the original objective was management or policy focused. InterimXX Report Report | Water | Water Science Science Capability Capability Audit Audit 4 Executive Summary • Most of the resources were spent within DNRM (45.4%) and DSITIA • Within the five departments, there is very limited investment in longer (44.6%), although the DNRM figure is inflated by $7 million (17.3%) term strategic research on water-related science and technology committed to stream flow gauging and groundwater measurements, issues. This contrasts with the thirty year horizon taken in developing which is required for management rather than scientific purposes, but a water plan for the state (WaterQ). It is not clear how the current which generates data of scientific and future policy value. applied science and research capability within the state informs and will assist the achievement of the water plan goals. • The total spend in Queensland in 2012-13 on water-related science and R&D outside of the Queensland Government (not including the • The dominant feature of the delivery program is the role of DSITIA private sector) exceeded $100 million, i.e. almost three times the Science Delivery Division (SDD) as service provider to the other spend by Government. While the focus of some of this work differs agencies. This model differs from the traditional approach where from departmental priorities, it provides evidence of significant water- relevant science capability is co-located in the same agency as the related science capability existing in Queensland outside of the five related policy, management or regulatory functions. This mode of departments. delivery has both advantages (focus, perceived independence) and challenges (scale, culture, inflexibility, sensitivity to short term • Reliable trend data over time on water-related science and R&D changes in funding). expenditure was difficult to obtain due to recent departmental restructuring. The data that was available, acknowledged reductions • In particular, the delivery model requires the existence of in full time equivalent (FTE) numbers and external commentary all mechanisms for effective translation of applied science and R&D to attested to a drop in capability over the past two years.